Why did the April Index Raise DA?
-
All of our websites DA raised dramatically, including the competitors we track Any idea why this may have happened across the board?
-
Hi,
This is a recurring question on the Moz Q&A - you might want to check Rand's post about fluctuation of the DA in relation to index updates: https://mza.seotoolninja.com/community/q/da-pa-fluctuations-how-to-interpret-apply-understand-these-ml-based-scores
Dirk
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
My DA dropped suddenly
Hi Everyone! DA of my site dropped from 7 to 1. I don't know what is the reason behind it? Can you tell me what is the main reason of dropping down?
API | | lucas77861 -
/index.php causing a few issues
Hey Mozzers, Our site uses magento. Pages within the site (not categories or products) are set to display as www.domain.co.uk/page-url/ The hta access is set to redirect all version such as www.domain.co.uk/page-url to a url ending in a / However in google analytics and in moz landing page tracker these urls are being represented by www.domain.co.uk/page-url/index.php When visiting www.domain.co.uk/page-url/index.php a 404 is displayed. I know that by default when directed to a directory it automatically finds and displays the index file. So i understand why this is happening to some degree. However, when manually visiting this link does not exist. This poses a problem when trying to view the landing pages information in moz pro. I have 20 keywords being tracked in relation to www.domain.co.uk/page-url/ but because moz is recording it as www.domain.co.uk/page-url/index.php the keywords are unrelated so not showing information in relation to the page. Any ideas?
API | | ATP0 -
The April Index Update is Here!
Don’t adjust your monitors, or think this is an elaborate April Fool’s joke, we are actually releasing our April Index Update EARLY! We had planned to release our April Index Update on the 6th, but processing went incredibly smoothly and left us the ability to get it up today. Let’s dig into the details of the April Index Release: 138,919,156,028 (139 billion) URLs. 746,834,537 (747 million) subdomains. 190,170,132 (190 million) root domains. 1,116,945,451,603 (1.1 Trillion) links. Followed vs nofollowed links 3.02% of all links found were nofollowed 61.79% of nofollowed links are internal 38.21% are external Rel canonical: 28.14% of all pages employ the rel=canonical tag The average page has 90 links on it 73 internal links on average. 17 external links on average. Don’t let me hold you up, go dive into the data! PS - For any questions about DA/PA fluctuations (or non-fluctuations) check out this Q&A thread from Rand:https://mza.seotoolninja.com/community/q/da-pa-fluctuations-how-to-interpret-apply-understand-these-ml-based-scores
API | | IanWatson9 -
First Mozscape index of the year is live
I'm happy to announce, the first index of the year is out. We did have a smaller count of subdomains, but correlations are generally up and coverage of what's in Google looks better, too. We're giving that one a high five! We've (hopefully) removed a lot of foreign and spam subdomains, which you might see reflected in your spam links section. (another woot!) Here are some details about this index release: 145,549,223,632 (145 billion) URLs 1,356,731,650 (1 billion) subdomains 200,255,095 (200 million) root domains 1,165,625,349,576 (1.1 Trillion) links Followed vs nofollowed links 3.17% of all links found were nofollowed 63.49% of nofollowed links are internal 36.51% are external Rel canonical: 26.50% of all pages employ the rel=canonical tag The average page has 89 links on it 72 internal links on average 17 external links on average Thanks! PS - For any questions about DA/PA fluctuations (or non-fluctuations) check out this Q&A thread from Rand: https://mza.seotoolninja.com/community/q/da-pa-fluctuations-how-to-interpret-apply-understand-these-ml-based-scores.
API | | jennita5 -
September's Mozscape Update Broke; We're Building a New Index
Hey gang, I hate to write to you all again with more bad news, but such is life. Our big data team produced an index this week but, upon analysis, found that our crawlers had encountered a massive number of non-200 URLs, which meant this index was not only smaller, but also weirdly biased. PA and DA scores were way off, coverage of the right URLs went haywire, and our metrics that we use to gauge quality told us this index simply was not good enough to launch. Thus, we're in the process of rebuilding an index as fast as possible, but this takes, at minimum 19-20 days, and may take as long as 30 days. This sucks. There's no excuse. We need to do better and we owe all of you and all of the folks who use Mozscape better, more reliable updates. I'm embarassed and so is the team. We all want to deliver the best product, but continue to find problems we didn't account for, and have to go back and build systems in our software to look for them. In the spirit of transparency (not as an excuse), the problem appears to be a large number of new subdomains that found their way into our crawlers and exposed us to issues fetching robots.txt files that timed out and stalled our crawlers. In addition, some new portions of the link graph we crawled exposed us to websites/pages that we need to find ways to exclude, as these abuse our metrics for prioritizing crawls (aka PageRank, much like Google, but they're obviously much more sophisticated and experienced with this) and bias us to junky stuff which keeps us from getting to the good stuff we need. We have dozens of ideas to fix this, and we've managed to fix problems like this in the past (prior issues like .cn domains overwhelming our index, link wheels and webspam holes, etc plagued us and have been addressed, but every couple indices it seems we face a new challenge like this). Our biggest issue is one of monitoring and processing times. We don't see what's in a web index until it's finished processing, which means we don't know if we're building a good index until it's done. It's a lot of work to re-build the processing system so there can be visibility at checkpoints, but that appears to be necessary right now. Unfortunately, it takes time away from building the new, realtime version of our index (which is what we really want to finish and launch!). Such is the frustration of trying to tweak an old system while simultaneously working on a new, better one. Tradeoffs have to be made. For now, we're prioritizing fixing the old Mozscape system, getting a new index out as soon as possible, and then working to improve visibility and our crawl rules. I'm happy to answer any and all questions, and you have my deep, regretful apologies for once again letting you down. We will continue to do everything in our power to improve and fix these ongoing problems.
API | | randfish11 -
Suggestion - How to improve OSE metrics for DA & PA
I am sure everyone is aware at Moz, that although the Moz link metrics ( primarily I am talking about DA & PA) are good, there is a lot of room for improvement, and that there are a lot of areas where the metric values given to some types of site are well out of whack with what their "real" values should be. Some examples
API | | James77
www.somuch.com (Link Directory) - DA 72
www.articlesbase.com (Article Directory) - DA 89
www.ezinearticles.com (Article Directory) - DA 91 I'm sure everyone would agree that links from these domains are not as powerful (if of any value at all), as their DA would suggest, and therefore by definition of how moz metrics work, the sites these have links from such sites are also inflated - thus they throw the whole link graph out of whack. I have 2 suggestions which could be used to singularly or in conjunction (and obviously with other factors that Moz use to calculate DA and PA) which could help move these values to what they should more realistically be. 1/. Incorporate rank values.
This is effectively using rank values to reverse engine what google (or other engines) as a "value" on a website. This could be achieved (if moz were not to build the data gathering system itself), by intergrating with a company that already provides this data - eg searchmetrics, semrush etc. As an example you would take a domian and pull in some rank values eg http://www.semrush.com/info/somuch.com?db=us - where you could use traffic, traffic price, traffic history as a metric as part of the overall Moz scoring alogrithm. As you can see from my example according to SEMRush the amount of traffic and traffic price is extreamly low for what you would expect of a website that has a DA of 72. Likewise you will find this for the other two sites and similarly to pretty much any other site you will test. This is essentially because your tapping into Googles own ranking factors, and thereby more inline with what real values (according to Google) are with respect to the quality of a website. Therefore if you were to incorporate these values, I believe you could improve the Moz metrics. 2/. Social Sharing Value
Another strong indicator of quality the amount of social sharing of a document or website as a whole, and again you will find as with my examples, that pages on these sites have low social metrics in comparison to what you would normally associate with sites of these DA values. Obviously to do this you would need to pull social metrics of all the pages in your link DB. Or if this we to tech intense to achieve, again work with a partner such as searchmetrics, which provide "Total Social Interations" on a domain level basis. Divide this value by the number of Moz crawled pages and you would have a crude value of the overall average social scorability of a webpage on a given site. Obviously both the above, do have their flaws if you looked at them in complete isolation, however in combination they could provide a robust metric to use in any alogrithm, and in combination with current moz values used in the alogrithm I believe you could make big strides into improving overall Moz metrics.1 -
Suggestion - Should OSE include "citation links" within its index?
This is really a suggestion (and debate to see if people agree with me), with regard to including "citation links" within Moz tools, by default, as just another type of link NOTE: when I am talking about "citation links" I am talking about a link that is not wrapped in a link tag and is therefore non clickable, eg moz.com Obviously Moz have released the mentions tool, which is great, and also FWE which is also great. However, it would seem to me that they are missing a trick in that "citation links" don't feature in the main link index at all. We know that Google as a minimum uses them as an indicator to crawl a page ( http://ignitevisibility.com/google-confirms-url-citations-can-help-pages-get-indexed/ ), and also that they don't pass page rank - HOWEVER, you would assume that google does use then as part of their alogrithm in some manner as they do nofollow links. It would seem to me that a "Citation Link" could (possibly) be deemed more important than a no follow link in Googles alogrithm, as a "no follow" link is a clear indication by the site owner that they don't fully trust the link, but a citation link would neither indicate trust or non trust. So - my request is to get "citation links" into the main link index (and the Just Discovered index for that matter). Would others agree??
API | | James770